Free Search

[keith higson]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

No Keith I don't think that is entirely true.
What they are saying is that they will trace where your ancestors came from in the world.
They will trace your ethnicity, not specifically your ancestors.
The work of tracing your own specific ancestors is down to you...you have to do the brainwork.

I realize what they mean but this is not reeflected in their adverts which gives people (mainly females - tonque in cheek) the wrong impression. But then again nothing can be done officially to them because they have not made a false statement.

[Rowlf]

In their advert they also say to put your name in and find your ancestors. Well I can tell you it is not that easy. As Margaret rightly said you have to do the brainwork. The' Who do you think you are' television series also gives a wrong impression as it shows people getting birth,marriage and death certificates and census images very easily and anyone starting to look for their own family will find it is hard work.

[dotti34]

You are spot on there, Rowlf. The people who take part in 'Who Do You Think You Are' have had all the heavy work done for them. Everything has been laid out for them, records are produced immediately they are asked for (and we all know how long it takes to search such things in the real world).

Experts in the field have done the research for them, they just have to go along with it. Have to say though that I really enjoy watching the show, find it (usually) very interesting, but from personal experience I know that information doesn't just happen like the show portrays. It takes a lot of time and research to find out anything at all, and frustrating when the information just isn't there.

[ossy kid]

Also remember it's their job to make the show interesting, who is going to argue that their findings are true or fabricated. I watch one show where they told a film star that they were related to William the conqueror, a very interesting show but??

[Margaret Pilkington]

Yes, it is an interesting show, but I think that if you have the nous to realise that all the stuff portrayed has probably been researched by a group of very experienced researchers with access to all areas and documentation, that is IS a show, it puts it into perspective.
Those ordinary folk who try to research their ancestors do not have the luxury of all the resources that the TV researchers have.
That said, it is still a very interesting and thought provoking pursuit.
You have to be prepared to follow lines of enquiry which result in either disappointment or dead end...but just now and then you have a 'eureka' moment which makes it all worthwhile(or is that because I am just a beginner?).

[Morecambe Ex Pat]

Being able to waltz into the records office and have your own personal archivist locate the relevant documents, would be great if it was available in real life. No doubt it would be possible if you threw enough shillings at them.

The cost of certificates to prove your findings is also prohibitive to us mere mortals with limited budgets.

We took full advantage of the free access to census records, over Easter, and discovered a number of new people.

The main problem with genealogy is the more you discover, the more questions are raised, it becomes a never ending quest.

[Margaret Pilkington]

That is so true.
You feel like you are just a finger tip away from finding the answers, but in truth,the answer poses more questions.
I also made good use of the free weekend and got so involved that I signed up for a six month subscription.
I am enjoying the mental challenges right now and have discovered much that I did not know.

[ossy kid]

After tracing family trees for 30 years Margaret I think I have just a little "nous" and it doesn't matter how much money you throw at it some records are just not there.

[Rowlf]

You are right Morecambe Ex Pat about certificates going up, They have increased by about 50% since I started getting them. The trouble is you needed them to find the maiden names of mothers on birth certs and fathers names on marriage certs and believe me that is essential when you are looking for Smiths !!

[Margaret Pilkington]

I wasn't meaning that Ossy Kid...I was meaning that you have to have the nous to realise the conditions on this show are not like the ones which ordinary searchers encounter.
And yes, you are right, sometimes you hit a wall because there are no further documents to follow.

I know you are good researcher(from the help you have given people on here)and I envy your skills, but I know that these have been patiently acquired over those 30 years.

[Retlaw]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

I wasn't meaning that Ossy Kid...I was meaning that you have to have the nous to realise the conditions on this show are not like the ones which ordinary searchers encounter.
And yes, you are right, sometimes you hit a wall because there are no further documents to follow.

I know you are good researcher(from the help you have given people on here)and I envy your skills, but I know that these have been patiently acquired over those 30 years.

Aye Margaret, like Ossy Kid I have been at this game a long long time, at first it was hard work, but then it became easier as the mind learnt new tricks, thinking straight ahead doesn't always work, you start to think sideways as well, and you have to have a large pile of salt handy. One of the great difficulties is interpreting badly written indexes, and what it should mean, but even after all these years, I still feel good when a puzzle is solved.
As for that who do you think you are, I think they do a lot of research into dozens of so-called stars, before they pick one to carry on with, and sometimes they've spent so much on the programme that they can't afford to drop it, so little fabrication, and who out there is gonna prove em wrong.
Donkeys years back, when Jack Broderick was deciphering the old parish records. I was creating indexes, we both came to the conclusion that if anyone claimed they could trace their family back to 1700 with absolute certanty, they were a damned good liar, the spelling in those days was enough to make you want to shoot yourself, and the number of John the son of John, whew let me out of here

[keith higson]

n that if anyone claimed they could trace their family back to 1700 with absolute certanty, they were a damned good liar, the spelling in those days was enough to make you want to shoot yourself, and the number of John the son of John, whew let me out of here
[/B][/FONT][/COLOR][/QUOTE]

Some twenty five years ago I received a Family tree going back to 1604 which took a cousin of mine in Bolton quite a long time to do,

Fortunately she lived within 10 miles from where mostof my relos lived, she was able to visit the Parish Curch, graveyards even addresses that showed up on the Cencus.Thereby eabling herself to be sure that she had got the person. After she died her Son took the job up.

Seeing that I had such a good base I've found relations in Canada, New so yea there is a lot of work in it but look at the reards.Zealand and even here in Oz. which increases the size from 350 to over 600. But look at the rewards

[Margaret Pilkington]

Originally Posted by Retlaw

Aye Margaret, like Ossy Kid I have been at this game a long long time, at first it was hard work, but then it became easier as the mind learnt new tricks, thinking straight ahead doesn't always work, you start to think sideways as well, and you have to have a large pile of salt handy. One of the great difficulties is interpreting badly written indexes, and what it should mean, but even after all these years, I still feel good when a puzzle is solved.
As for that who do you think you are, I think they do a lot of research into dozens of so-called stars, before they pick one to carry on with, and sometimes they've spent so much on the programme that they can't afford to drop it, so little fabrication, and who out there is gonna prove em wrong.
Donkeys years back, when Jack Broderick was deciphering the old parish records. I was creating indexes, we both came to the conclusion that if anyone claimed they could trace their family back to 1700 with absolute certanty, they were a damned good liar, the spelling in those days was enough to make you want to shoot yourself, and the number of John the son of John, whew let me out of here

Yes Retlaw, you are right about the not thinking in straight lines, and also about the writing.
Those Bishops transcripts are very hard to read...even to someone like me with practice at illegible writing.
It also gets very confusing when children have died and the next child (of the same gender)is named after the deceased...and some of the records do not let you look at the actual document. They only let you look at what someone has transcribed.(not to be trusted, I try to find corroborative evidence from elsewhere)
On one of my relatives they are transcribed as Bratcliffe when they were actually called Ratcliffe. Being able to look at the actual document which also has the parents on it made the difference to me accepting or discarding the information.

So yes, I have still a very long way to go to achieve the skills and knowledge that you and Ossy Kid have. It is something I can aspire to( even though I haven't got the years ahead of me that you both had).
The salt cellar stands at my right hand alongside a very large box of patience

[Margaret Pilkington]

And then there is that trick our ancestors played on us where they add another name.
So you will be looking for John and it will be down as John Thomas.
I found this with one of my relatives.
So how do I know that he is the same person...well on the census a decade later he is there...with this additional name at the same address, with the same parents and another two siblings and grandma.
I think their houses had elastic sides.

[Retlaw]

Originally Posted by Margaret Pilkington

And then there is that trick our ancestors played on us where they add another name.
So you will be looking for John and it will be down as John Thomas.
I found this with one of my relatives.
So how do I know that he is the same person...well on the census a decade later he is there...with this additional name at the same address, with the same parents and another two siblings and grandma.
I think their houses had elastic sides.

Margsret, Sumat else I forgot to mention, Calendar Change, when the new year was changed fron Easter to January, if you don't make the correction at the right time, then you can finish up with children dead before there born an Viky Verky, becomes a bit awkward at times, as for wrong spellings etc, a lot also had to do with god botherers wi cloth ears, unable to understand Lanky, an wrote wod he thowt he heard, then you've got the one who forgot to write in his book, nissed as a pewt ont thalter wine, shouts tu sexton who did we plant over there last week. Jim Joinson, thank you and then write John Jimson. Welcome to the fold.